Search - まっすぐに蹴る ネタバレ

Beaulac:-Points #1, #2 & #4- These comments all deal with taxation year prior to 1994. ...

If this section were to apply to the present appellant, as suggested by the respondent, she would be paying a tax of close to $70,000 (or $69,860.03) as hereinafter set down instead of an amount of $55,057.12 according to the appellant or $51,067.27 if she was living in the Province of Ontario, as hereunder set down: Federal tax of $16,280.69 Provincial tax of $ 4,225.78 US tax of $30,560.80 $51,067.27 According to the calculations of the appellant, the latter should pay a tax of $55,057.12 on a taxable income of $97,487.47: Federal tax Satin Nil Provincial tax ches cha $24,497.32 US tax $30,560.80 $55,057.12 She would, according to the respondent, on a taxable income of $97,487.47 pay a tax of $69,860.03: Federal tax $14,801.91 Provincial tax $24,497.32 US tax $30,560.80 $69,860.03 Counsel for the appellant says that the latter is not trying to avoid or lessen her tax liabilities on the income she has received. ...

The legislation provided that, on the initiation of the taxation of capital gains, the market value of shares quoted on the London Stock Exchange be determined with reference to its market quotations on April 6, 1965, except where in consequence of special circumstances prices so quoted are by themselves not a proper measure of market value.” [1] In November 1964 serious discussions had begun between the chairman of Vickers Ltd and the taxpayer’s father, chairman of R W Crabtree & Sons Ltd contemplating the acquisition of all of the latter company’s issued shares by Vickers Ltd. ...

By a letter (Exhibit P-23), dated December 19, 1947 (! attach no significance to the discrepancy in dates) referring to the transactions previously described, the plaintiff undertook to pay the optionees, personally and not in their capacities as syndicate managers, the sum of $50,000 out of the plaintiff’s 50% share of the net proceeds of production. ...

The passage from which the foregoing statement by Mr Justice Judson is taken, at pages 606-7 [315, 5229], is:.. » The option, in my opinion, is all important. ...

Throughout the years the plaintiffs’ returns were prepared by a firm of Montreal chartered accountants, Messrs Mallette, Cote, Normandin & Company. ...

In support of this submission, the appellant called as an expert witness Mr Jacques Gunn, a chartered accountant and resident partner at Quebec City in the firm of Riddell, Stead & Co. ...

We are concurrently instructing our solicitors’ McEwen, Hill & Company to prepare the necessary mortgage papers and these will be forwarded direct to you for completion. ...

Since the matter of Sutton Lumber & Trading Co Ltd v MNR, [1953] 2 S.C.R. 77; [1953] CTC 237; 53 DTC 1158, it is well known that the main criterion to be used in order to decide if there is an adventure in the nature of trade is the course of conduct. ...

Viscount Finlay said: “... the legatee of a share in the residue has no interest in any of the property of the testator until the residue has been ascertained. ...